As we know, most lenses hit peak performance when stopped down two or three stops from max aperture. Coupled with the desire of, admittedly most, for big holes when wide open, this leads to largish, heavy lenses with best performance typically at about f 4. It also means great Depth of Field is gained at the expense of inferior lens performance.

Since most landscape photographers often prefer to be in f 8 to f16 territory and favor smaller, lighter gear, would they --- would you --- be attracted to a Landscape Series of primes with maximum apertures of f 4?

These lenses could be small, light, high performers peaking at, perhaps, f 11 for the shorter, f 16 for the longer ones. They should be relatively easy to design and build, selling for significantly less than their f 1.4 / f 2 counterparts.

20, 30, 50, 90mm?

Perhaps it would represent too small a potential market for Nikon or even Sigma. Perhaps not.